Other

Guest, I have a big favor to ask you. We've been working very hard to establish ourselves on social media. If you like/follow our pages it would be a HUGE help to us.
SoSH on Facebook and Inside the Pylon
Thanks!
Nip

Lots of chatter about "soft goals" in the Game Threads and elsewhere. Khudobin only saw 8 shots in a little more than 1 period, but he did stop them all, while Rask ended the series with an .899 save percentage.

Do we think the team should be considering seeing if Khudobin could get on one of his hot streaks and "steal" Game 1 down in Tampa?

Probably not game 1, and, in fairness to Rask, a lot of the goals he allowed came off bad defensive breakdowns. That said, there were some he should have stopped and they aren't going far with an .899 goalie who can't steal one. At some point, if his current level continues, Khudobin should get a look.

It was hard last night not to think about a goalie pull and whether Rask should be replaced. But I don't see Cassidy going there for game 1 and in the absence of an absolute stinker by Rask. I think Cassidy would see that as a panic move and I think he believes that Rask is simply better than Khudboin. So I don't think there's much of a chance that a switch will be made. That said, Cassidy did go to his back-up for a number of games early in the year, ostensibly to get Rask going and give him a bit of a kick in the pants, so it's not impossible that he would try something unorthodox here. I just think it's pretty unlikely absent some kind of Rask meltdown.

Had Tim Thomas not had one of the greatest post-season runs in history in 2010-11 I think the narrative around Tuukka is completely different.

Everyone looks at that run and holds Tuukka up to that, and frankly it’s unfair. The Bruins should NOT have won the Cup that year - but Thomas had a stretch that will forever be remembered around here for its absurdity and timeliness.

Everyone uses that run as the standard for what playoff performance should be, or needs to be for a goalie to be “good.”

Similar to how any quarterback who succeeds Brady will NEVER live up to Brady’s standard for QB play - any goalie following up that performance is going to be at a severe disadvantage.

Game 1: Bruins win 5-1, Rask is really good.
Game 2: Bruins win 7-3, Rask is not quite really good, but solid enough.
Game 3: Bruins lose 4-2, Rask isn't very good.
Game 4: Bruins win 3-1, Rask is outstanding.
Game 5: Bruins lose 4-3, Rask isn't very good at all, but he's great in the third period as the Bs try to mount a comeback. In fact, for almost the last half of the game he gives up zip.
Game 6: Bruins lose 3-1, Rask is for the most part pretty solid, and the last goal is an empty-netter.
Game 7: Bruins win 7-4. Let's look more closely at the four goals Rask allowed.

First goal: Tip off a hard slap shot. 95 miles an hour, changing direction 18 inches in front of him. It's like demanding that a catcher catch a foul tip off a major league fastball. When it changes direction at that speed that close to you, it's a matter of luck whether you can stop it or not, it seems to me.

Second goal: From about 12 feet out, at a tough angle. This one I think Rask should have stopped. There was no screen, no nothing.

Third goal: Another shot that got deflected once, maybe even twice. Again, when a puck changes directions like that, it's awfully hard to stop.

Fourth goal: Shorthanded breakaway where the Leaf scorer made an incredible move.

So three of the four goals were not goals that I think Rask should have stopped. COULD he have stopped them? Sure I guess. But two redirections and a one-on-one breakaway where the guy made a stellar move. You guys who know more about hockey can tell me more about whether he did a bad job leaving rebounds in front of the net, etc. But I think three of the four goals were not plays you really should expect the goalie to make, and he did pitch a shutout in the third period, giving Boston a chance to come back.

He makes me nervous as hell. When he's on, he's impregnable. But when he's not...yikes. For all the accolades being thrown Andersen's way during this series, he got pulled himself, and the Leafs gave up 5, 7, and 7 goals in three of the games.

The weird thing about hockey is the tradition that if you're losing you put in a worse player at the most important position. The second goal was bad last night but I agree that the rest were tough saves to make.

There's also the eternal small sample size of save percentage. If Tuukka has a shutout in game 1 with say 30 saves he'll have a .913 SV% for the playoffs and then he looks fine.

At even strength Tuukka had a .913 SV% in the first round. He had a .923 at even strength in the regular season (this was below par for him, but as we know he struggled some early on). If he had saved the second goal last night, or if one shot wasn't tipped, or if literally one tiny thing went differently on any of the goals, he would have had a .920 sv% at ES in the first round which is basically what he gave you in the regular season.

Had Tim Thomas not had one of the greatest post-season runs in history in 2010-11 I think the narrative around Tuukka is completely different.

Everyone looks at that run and holds Tuukka up to that, and frankly it’s unfair. The Bruins should NOT have won the Cup that year - but Thomas had a stretch that will forever be remembered around here for its absurdity and timeliness.

Everyone uses that run as the standard for what playoff performance should be, or needs to be for a goalie to be “good.”

Similar to how any quarterback who succeeds Brady will NEVER live up to Brady’s standard for QB play - any goalie following up that performance is going to be at a severe disadvantage.

Click to expand...

I also think 2013 has to do with it where people blame him for shitty defense and he would've won the Conn Smythe had the B's won.

Also, Khudobin is a not good goalie who got hot for a few games and then was pretty much shit for the rest of the year.

My favorite point to make is to ask people how many goals Tuukka gave up to the top offense in the league (Pittsburgh) in the 2013 playoffs.

Take a guess.

I’ll wait.

(The answer is 2. He gave up 2 goals in the Eastern Conference Finals.)

Click to expand...

I guess that's what makes him so frustrating though. He gave up 2 goals in 4 games to Pitt. He was ridiculous. He was great against the Rangers too. But he also gave up 4 in the Game 7 against Toronto that year. He gave up the 2 in 17 seconds in Game 6 of the Final (although he had an excellent series otherwise). He's been the goalie to carry them to the Final, but he's also been the goalie for the team when they've blown series leads of 3-0 and 3-2, and came very close to blowing 3-1 series leads in both series against Toronto. He's kind of all over the place in the playoffs.

His Game 7 goals allowed in his career: 4, 4, 3, 4. Yes, this is an unfair thing to point out, but still.

Is he a guy who can steal a series? I just don't know. Maybe that's an unfair standard, but he's getting $7 million for a reason.He won the Vezina in 2013-14 and deservedly so, but then crapped out against Montreal, which was AWFUL.

I guess I just don't know, even after all these years. If he's on the team next year he'll likely break the all time wins record for the franchise, and yet I just don't know about him sometimes.

I don't think there's any way Cassidy gives Dobby a start in this series unless Rask gets hurt.

I also think 2013 has to do with it where people blame him for shitty defense and he would've won the Conn Smythe had the B's won.

Also, Khudobin is a not good goalie who got hot for a few games and then was pretty much shit for the rest of the year.

Click to expand...

That's not entirely true. He had a hot streak, that is true. But even when it ended, he was exactly what you wanted from your backup. He had a bad stretch of 3 games in late March, when the team could have unfortunately used one more good game from him. But he was hardly "pretty much shit".

Still, this team is going to ride Rask throughout the playoffs, for better or worse. If Khudobin is given a desperation start, that would not be a good thing.

I do agree that Rask is being paid a lot of money and is not always a rock star in the playoffs. He strikes me as being a better than league average goalie that at times is unconscious, but is not often good enough to steal an entire playoff series like Tim Thomas did a couple of times during that Cup run. Then again, we said a lot of the same things about Thomas until he did win his Smythe, so there is hope.

No question he righted the ship and pretty much set the tone for their season back in October. But since the end of November he's got a .903 sv% in 20 starts.

Click to expand...

Not sure that's much different than most other backups, and if you're going to take away his best stretch, you could also take away his final 3 games (2 losses and 1 win). Do that, his save percentage jumps to 0.930 over 17 starts.

I was very vocal in demanding that he be pulled last night. In hindsight, I still would have, but simultaneously also in hindsight I'm very glad that Cassidy did not, because going into Game 1 against Tampa with a pseudo-goalie controversy would not be great.

Khudobin would be obliterated trying to go post to post on any TB power play. I don't have much confidence in Tuukka overall, but the defense was significantly worse than he was last night. Take away a handful of blown plays by the guys in front of him and you're talking about 1 or 2 GA at most and this thread doesn't exist.

His Game 7 goals allowed in his career: 4, 4, 3, 4. Yes, this is an unfair thing to point out, but still.

Is he a guy who can steal a series? I just don't know. Maybe that's an unfair standard, but he's getting $7 million for a reason.He won the Vezina in 2013-14 and deservedly so, but then crapped out against Montreal, which was AWFUL.

I guess I just don't know, even after all these years. If he's on the team next year he'll likely break the all time wins record for the franchise, and yet I just don't know about him sometimes.

I don't think there's any way Cassidy gives Dobby a start in this series unless Rask gets hurt.

Click to expand...

Including last night, Rask is a career 5-16 in elimination games with a sub .900 sv% and 3.00+ GAA. Brutal. Add to that the number of collapses with him in goal -- 2010 vs Flyers, losing to 8th seeded Montreal in the first round, losing to Washington in 7, missing the playoffs 2 straight years with chances to sneak in at the end of the season -- I don't know how anyone can be confident with Rask as your playoff goalie.

It's all moot though, as Sweeney had the next guy and moved him for a draft pick.

Yeah, Khudobin was garbage outside of the 10 day hot stretch in November.

Click to expand...

Outside his final 3 games, not quite correct.

Anyway, I wonder how much of Rask's struggles can be attributed to the Bruins defense. The possession stats (which, of course, are impacted by the very small sample size) show that Chara, McAvoy, Grzelcyk and McQuaid did not exactly do Rask any favors. And Rask's save percentage when Krug was on the ice was dreadful.

Including last night, Rask is a career 5-16 in elimination games with a sub .900 sv% and 3.00+ GAA. Brutal. Add to that the number of collapses with him in goal -- 2010 vs Flyers, losing to 8th seeded Montreal in the first round, losing to Washington in 7, missing the playoffs 2 straight years with chances to sneak in at the end of the season -- I don't know how anyone can be confident with Rask as your playoff goalie.

It's all moot though, as Sweeney had the next guy and moved him for a draft pick.

Click to expand...

How has Tuukka lost 16 elimination games when he’s only made 4 playoff season appearances (before this year)? How is it Tuukka’s fault that Tim Thomas lost to Washington in 7 games? When did the Bruins lose to an 8th seeded Montreal in the first round?

Including last night, Rask is a career 5-16 in elimination games with a sub .900 sv% and 3.00+ GAA. Brutal. Add to that the number of collapses with him in goal -- 2010 vs Flyers, losing to 8th seeded Montreal in the first round, losing to Washington in 7, missing the playoffs 2 straight years with chances to sneak in at the end of the season -- I don't know how anyone can be confident with Rask as your playoff goalie.

It's all moot though, as Sweeney had the next guy and moved him for a draft pick.

Click to expand...

If you're referring to Martin Jones, that draft pick is one of the organization's more highly rated prospects. And Jones's stats are no better than Rask's.

How has Tuukka lost 16 elimination games when he’s only made 4 playoff season appearances (before this year)? How is it Tuukka’s fault that Tim Thomas lost to Washington in 7 games? When did the Bruins lose to an 8th seeded Montreal in the first round?

Click to expand...

2004. And that was Raycroft. Who was traded for Rask. So it's all Tuukka's fault.

How has Tuukka lost 16 elimination games when he’s only made 4 playoff season appearances (before this year)? How is it Tuukka’s fault that Tim Thomas lost to Washington in 7 games? When did the Bruins lose to an 8th seeded Montreal in the first round?

Click to expand...

It includes when the B's can close teams out as well as when the B's can be closed out. So basically whenever the B's or their opponent have 3 wins. Not sure if that includes when Thomas was a starter or not.

Including last night, Rask is a career 5-16 in elimination games with a sub .900 sv% and 3.00+ GAA. Brutal. Add to that the number of collapses with him in goal -- 2010 vs Flyers, losing to 8th seeded Montreal in the first round, losing to Washington in 7, missing the playoffs 2 straight years with chances to sneak in at the end of the season -- I don't know how anyone can be confident with Rask as your playoff goalie.

It's all moot though, as Sweeney had the next guy and moved him for a draft pick.

Click to expand...

Why didn't you mention 2013? That seems to be the one data point missing from your analysis.

It includes when the B's can close teams out as well as when the B's can be closed out. So basically whenever the B's or their opponent have 3 wins. Not sure if that includes when Thomas was a starter or not.

Click to expand...

Ah. Well that’s dumb. Well he’s won 6 series as a goalie for the B’s so the stat is still wrong.

Had Tim Thomas not had one of the greatest post-season runs in history in 2010-11 I think the narrative around Tuukka is completely different.

Everyone looks at that run and holds Tuukka up to that, and frankly it’s unfair. The Bruins should NOT have won the Cup that year - but Thomas had a stretch that will forever be remembered around here for its absurdity and timeliness.

Everyone uses that run as the standard for what playoff performance should be, or needs to be for a goalie to be “good.”

Similar to how any quarterback who succeeds Brady will NEVER live up to Brady’s standard for QB play - any goalie following up that performance is going to be at a severe disadvantage.

Click to expand...

I posted this in the game thread as well. I don't think Rask has gotten over the stink of the 2010 Flyers collapse and the 2014 Habs mini-collapse. It's not fair to him but it's there. Remember that Thomas was going to be run of town after the Game 7 loss to the Canes in 2009. 2011 made him a Bruins legend.

That series loss to the Flyers was 8 f***ing years ago, when Rask was 22 and was essentially a rookie. By the end of that series, the Bruins had lost 2 of their best forwards in Krejci and Sturm, while Savard was still dealing with concussion symptoms dealt to him by Matt Cooke. After Bergeron and the injured Krejci, the leaders in ice time were a 41 year old Recchi and a 35 year old Satan.

The next time Rask was a starting goalie for a playoff team was 2013. After taking a 3-1 series lead, the Bruins lost 2 straight to Toronto by a score of 2-1; Rask's save percentage those 2 games was 0.932. And while Rask wasn't great in Game 7 of that series, he did make some saves in the 3rd period and in overtime when the margin for error was nil. He followed that series up with his stellar performances against the Rangers and in particular the Pens.

Now, about that Chicago series, the one in which Rask's save percentage was 0.932: we're probably have a very different conversation if the Bruins converted one of the 2 overtime power play opportunities they were gifted when the Hawks screwed up their line changes twice in Game 1, the same game in which Rask made 59 saves. And, yes, that late game collapse in Game 6 was painful, but Chicago was all over Rask throughout the 3rd period (16 shots). We're likely having a very different conversation if Bergeron wasn't playing on one lung or if Seguin hadn't been on a bender throughout the series. As noted above, the Hawks were the best team in the league that year.

Now on to 2014. Rask had a 0.961 save percentage in the opening series against the Red Wings, and the only loss was 1-0 in the opener. Against the Canadiens, Rask did not have a great series. But the Bruins skaters scored only 1 goal combined in the final 2 games, so the series loss wasn't entirely Rask's fault either. Lucic, Eriksson, Krejci, and Chara were absolutely pathetic in that series and in those final 2 games; Marchand didn't help the team's cause either, IIRC.

Forget last year's playoff series against Ottawa, unless you want to take a look at who was playing on the blue line for the Bruins that series.

Every time I hear an NHL player talk about Rask, they talk about how awesome he is and how he's a top 5 goalie in the League.
Every time I hear people shitting on Rask, it's dudes who don't have much beyond cursory knowledge of the position.

Rask had a stinker in game 5, and had 2-3 other goals he'd probably like back over the course of this series. If they want to win the Cup, he's going to have to play better; but a good 75% of the criticism I read/hear of him is foolish.

Edit: Yeah, great post @lexrageorge . Also @cshea for providing facts, which for most of us paint a clearer picture than filling a diaper with Felger-esque analysis.

Rask 100% starts in G1. But, Tampa's offense is skilled and lethal, so if he isn't moving well side-to-side and throws up a couple of stinkers early in the series, I could see a temporary move being made and see if Dobby can catch fiya for a bit. That being said, I don't think this D corps is protecting him all that well.

On Taranna's second goal, did Rask over-push/loose his balance, or is he purposefully guarding the near post that tight (his shoulder is lined up to the post)? I know nothing of goalie technique and positioning, but it would seem to me that you have to use the glove a bit to protect the near post, so that the body is centered on the shooter and taking away most of the goal. Then again, it was such a bang-bang play (off a bad turnover no less, IIRC it was McAvoy throwing it off the boards lazily) that it's wrong to blame Tuukka alone there.

Rask 100% starts in G1. But, Tampa's offense is skilled and lethal, so if he isn't moving well side-to-side and throws up a couple of stinkers early in the series, I could see a temporary move being made and see if Dobby can catch fiya for a bit. That being said, I don't think this D corps is protecting him all that well.

On Taranna's second goal, did Rask over-push/loose his balance, or is he purposefully guarding the near post that tight (his shoulder is lined up to the post)? I know nothing of goalie technique and positioning, but it would seem to me that you have to use the glove a bit to protect the near post, so that the body is centered on the shooter and taking away most of the goal. Then again, it was such a bang-bang play (off a bad turnover no less, IIRC it was McAvoy throwing it off the boards lazily) that it's wrong to blame Tuukka alone there.

Click to expand...

Marner held him to the center of the net for a while, and Rask had to push hard to get over and cover the far side...he pushed a bit too far and left the back side open. He wants that one back.

Edit:

Rask actually throws that back shoulder up at the shot at the last second but it's too late. The video at :50 or so shows how he went a bit further than he needed to.

I mean, he made a mistake, but that was a pretty solid shot by Marleau.

That series loss to the Flyers was 8 f***ing years ago, when Rask was 22 and was essentially a rookie. By the end of that series, the Bruins had lost 2 of their best forwards in Krejci and Sturm, while Savard was still dealing with concussion symptoms dealt to him by Matt Cooke. After Bergeron and the injured Krejci, the leaders in ice time were a 41 year old Recchi and a 35 year old Satan.

The next time Rask was a starting goalie for a playoff team was 2013. After taking a 3-1 series lead, the Bruins lost 2 straight to Toronto by a score of 2-1; Rask's save percentage those 2 games was 0.932. And while Rask wasn't great in Game 7 of that series, he did make some saves in the 3rd period and in overtime when the margin for error was nil. He followed that series up with his stellar performances against the Rangers and in particular the Pens.

Now, about that Chicago series, the one in which Rask's save percentage was 0.932: we're probably have a very different conversation if the Bruins converted one of the 2 overtime power play opportunities they were gifted when the Hawks screwed up their line changes twice in Game 1, the same game in which Rask made 59 saves. And, yes, that late game collapse in Game 6 was painful, but Chicago was all over Rask throughout the 3rd period (16 shots). We're likely having a very different conversation if Bergeron wasn't playing on one lung or if Seguin hadn't been on a bender throughout the series. As noted above, the Hawks were the best team in the league that year.

Now on to 2014. Rask had a 0.961 save percentage in the opening series against the Red Wings, and the only loss was 1-0 in the opener. Against the Canadiens, Rask did not have a great series. But the Bruins skaters scored only 1 goal combined in the final 2 games, so the series loss wasn't entirely Rask's fault either. Lucic, Eriksson, Krejci, and Chara were absolutely pathetic in that series and in those final 2 games; Marchand didn't help the team's cause either, IIRC.

Forget last year's playoff series against Ottawa, unless you want to take a look at who was playing on the blue line for the Bruins that series.

Click to expand...

Thank you. You articulated my feelings much better than I could. Fans and media hold Rask to the ridiculous standard of Tim Thomas 2011. However, as great as Thomas was in 2011 he had his fair share of crappy games in that playoff run yet people seem to forget that. The majority of fans and media gives Rask no credit for when he plays well so he's held to a double standard.

Rask is the guy moving forward and you just have to trust that he'll regain his regular playoff form.

Tuukka is more of a technical, system goalie. He is very mechanical in his movements and doesn't make the flopping saves of a Thomas, or even a Khudobin. Such a style of play looks better at times, but do the numbers bear it out?

If you have a Claude defensive plan in front of him, then he wins Vezinas. If there are defensive breakdowns, as are the tradeoff in Cassidy's system of engaging the D to move up ice, he is not an improviser and can be beat.

It appears he plays more to spots in the crease/net, rather than using athleticism to play the puck.

The thing about Tuukka is when he's going good it doesn't look like he's going good because he makes it look easy. Whereas with Timmy when he had it going he was diving across the crease and flopping around here and diving there. So it's easy to "see" that he's stealing games and doing amazing things. But for Rask you get "Sure they won, but Tuukka didn't have to stand on his head." Exactly! Because he was awesome and in control of everything. Which means he's never "stolen" a game because it doesn't look like he had to.

A 7 game sample size tells you nothing about a goalie. Rask's career body of work tells you a lot, he's been a borderline great playoff goalie his entire career, and it's silly to suggest otherwise.

However, his skills have declined over the past few years, he's no longer an elite goalie. He's probably an average starter. Toronto shot a little over 10% on the season and did the same this series. I think he's capable of being better but that's a pretty normal performance from Rask. He's certainly good enough to win a cup with, but I don't see him stealing a series on his own. They're going to have to beat teams

A 7 game sample size tells you nothing about a goalie. Rask's career body of work tells you a lot, he's been a borderline great playoff goalie his entire career, and it's silly to suggest otherwise.

However, his skills have declined over the past few years, he's no longer an elite goalie. He's probably an average starter. Toronto shot a little over 10% on the season and did the same this series. I think he's capable of being better but that's a pretty normal performance from Rask. He's certainly good enough to win a cup with, but I don't see him stealing a series on his own. They're going to have to beat teams

Click to expand...

This is about as fair an analysis as one can get.

His save percentages over the past 3 years are .915, .915, and .917. That's not elite, and this year not in the top 10. He's definitely slipped as he gets older.

Including last night, Rask is a career 5-16 in elimination games with a sub .900 sv% and 3.00+ GAA. Brutal. Add to that the number of collapses with him in goal -- 2010 vs Flyers, losing to 8th seeded Montreal in the first round, losing to Washington in 7, missing the playoffs 2 straight years with chances to sneak in at the end of the season -- I don't know how anyone can be confident with Rask as your playoff goalie.

It's all moot though, as Sweeney had the next guy and moved him for a draft pick.

Click to expand...

This is how I feel all Rask haters think and I tell myself that I'm being unfair. It's nice to be validated, I guess.

Rask takes heat because he was sick in the Olympics, and he was sick at the end of the regular season 2 years ago for important games. That, combined with the 2 goals to lose game 6 in 2013 and people accentuate his failures.

Rask is a pretty good goalie. Top 8-12 depending on the night. If you think he's worse than that, you need to take a better look at why you think that. If you think he's better than that, probably the same.

I was one of those calling for pulling him last night after the 4th goal. I was super down on him, despite being an ardent defender of him in the past. But that's why I keep that emotional diarrhea to the game thread.